58 messages over 8 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
frenkeld Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6945 days ago 2042 posts - 2719 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German
| Message 57 of 58 27 March 2007 at 2:57pm | IP Logged |
glossika wrote:
I've used these methods to acquire a wide range of languages outside of Germanic and Romance. |
|
|
The mortals would like to have more details. How exactly do you go about learning a new language?
Edited by frenkeld on 27 March 2007 at 5:17pm
1 person has voted this message useful
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7158 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish
| Message 58 of 58 27 March 2007 at 3:33pm | IP Logged |
glossika wrote:
Back to your original question: |
|
|
Chung wrote:
Is their acheivement of speaking Mandarin and at least another "dialect" worthy of being included in bilingualism or multilingualism? |
|
|
glossika wrote:
Depends on your definition of a dialect which is undoubtedly different than mine but has more to do with your education on the matter.
I don't call these Mandarin/Wu/Hakka/Cantonese/etc. distinctions "dialects" but rather "languages". I call "Jiaoliao", "Jianghuai", "Zhongyuan", "Xinan", etc. large dialect areas of Mandarin as a language, but I don't consider Mandarin itself a dialect. The same applies to the others, "Taihu" is a dialect area within the Wu language. Which makes sense because that's why I can understand Taihu speakers of Wu and not speakers of other areas.
I hope this helps clear up the issue on Chinese Dialects. |
|
|
My question was rhetorical, but perhaps my implication wasn't clear. It thus follows that I have for a long time considered someone who is for example fluent in Mandarin, Cantonese, and Hakka to be trilingual.
I am fully aware that "dialect" as understood in the English sense is a poor descriptor of Manadrin, Wu, Hakka, Min, Cantonese etc. I don't disagree with your approach comparing the dialects of China with the languages of the European Union.
I am also fully aware that Peking and many Chinese tacitly accept the widespread foreign use of "dialects" to describe what would more properly be called "languages". As far as I can tell, it suits the communist government to play down the linguistic differences of its Han citizens and encourage the using of the word "dialect" which has the connotation that one "dialect" (e.g. Cantonese) arises from or is socially or culturally subordinate to another one (usually read that the "Mandarin" dialect of Peking is more prestigious than Cantonese, Hakka, etc.)
1 person has voted this message useful
|
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.3438 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|